If you cannot let your daughter have these shoes because of your ideas, then you are just as controlled by gender conformity rules as anyone else. You just react AGAINST rather than TO. Either way you are not as enlightened as you think you are.

Two points: At least she has the awareness to self reflect on her feelings and opinions; and she nought her daughter those shoes. She's still a fairly judgmental person. My wife, a successful physician, mother and big fan of Disney Princesses would probably tell her to lighten up. You can let your daughters be themselves and still instill confidence in them.

That was very feminist of her to describe her daughter as physically attractive. Because at the root of it, that's what really counts...

She needs to continue her journey of self discovery, she's young still, she has time.

I raised two princesses decades ago, they're feminists now. Every little girl is a princess, but as a parent, it was up to me to define what "princess culture" was. Princesses have responsibilities, they have to earn trust, they have learn to work hard and think for themselves. In short, you can be willing to lay down your life for your princess, but you can't shelter them from the the world. Let them escape for a few hours in the princess movies or with sparkly pink shoes. You're teaching them critical thinking after all, they'll work it all out on their own.

Hmm, sometimes I worry about how mankind seems to be regressing into autocracy because of the indifference of most people to the loss of the freedoms they gained over the last several centuries, but I guess sparkly pink princess shoes are just as valid a concern to San Francisco writers.

I like the fact that it convienently leaves out the mention of the guy who helped her have those 2 kids, and is supporting her and her kids shoe shopping sprees while she tries to find herself most likely somewhere in her late 30s, working on her first novel.

- The ideals and goals of feminism are still desperately needed in today's society and are truly beneficial to all genders- A significant number of people have a warped view of what feminism actually means. This is due to various things such as past prejudices and old patterns, fear (of losing privilege), and, yes, even articles and statements by clueless self-proclaimed "feminists" (I'm looking at you Jebel, Slate, Salon, etc.) who are either selling something (page-clicks, "Bust Down the Patriarchy" iPhone apps, etc.), pushing their own selfish agendas, or are vainly attempting to give their miserable lives some sort of meaning by "fighting the good cause" as a "Social Justice Warrior".- The stated goals of most MRA's seem reasonable and worthy on paper, but I've yet to come across an MRA group that wasn't filled with sexist, impotent, whining bigots- Using terms like "mansplaining", "feminazi", etc. shows that you are not really interested in equality or working together to make the world a better place, but rather you are instead a puerile infant who's only argumentative technique is to hopefully shut down opposing arguments with ridicule and shame- Disney sells a product in order to meet a demand. If you don't like the product, don't buy it for your children.- Letting your young daughter dress up as a Disney princess will in no way cause here to be become weak or subservient to the dreaded "Patriarchy" (For FSM's sake, let kids be kids) How you raise her, and the values you instil in her are going to be what shape her, not the "Ariel Undersea Kitchen" her grandma bought her when she was 7- People who feel that they've "failed as a parent" because their daughter likes Princesses, "girl" lego, or other gender-specific toys have indeed failed as parents (or on the path to doing so), but not for the reasons that they think

Mansplaining is an offensive word, used to degrade anyone that doesn't agree with feminism or questions how it actually deals with equality. It is however quite useful for letting the world know that the person using it is radical with no interest in equality.

Lsherm:Another uncomfortable thought occurs to me. If I had a little boy who wanted to wear dresses, or only wear pink, I would make sure I nurtured that.

Yup, another open-minded feminist. She'd probably yell at you in the store if you told your boy he couldn't wear a dress, too.

You do realize that this is autobiographical, right? She's admitting this to herself and to the reader. It's like she's undergoing some growth and evolving her viewpoint as she confronts her own prejudices. Gosh, what a horrible person.

hardinparamedic:Oh good, another strawman RadFem that everyone can use to claim represents the actual philosophy of Feminism and dismiss arguments about civil and wage inequality, impropriety in prosecution of rape and abuse cases, and other bullshiat.

So she's okay with her son wearing dresses and pink (if she had one) but her daughter can't.

Feminism might be about a lot of things but true equality is not one of them

Thanks for mansplaining that.

How many feminists do you know that will argue for equality of men in cases where females have an advantage over males?

About half of the women I know who consider themselves feminist would, when confronted with those extremely rare circumstances.

Just for everyone's amusement, why don't you give us some examples of places were you think women have advantages over men.

Family court, child custody, Obamacare (all that free stuff attached for women's health issues)etc.Look at child support. In many states DNA evidence can prove a man is not the father of the child but he still can get stuck with child support. When was the last time a woman got stuck paying child support for a child that was not hers?

Feminism like other similar movements is not so much about equal treatment under the law but special treatment.

Look at the whole birth control abortion debate. for the Feminist the battle cry is my body my business and men should not be making laws about women's bodies. But when it comes to paying for the consequences of what they do with their bodies they sure don't object to the concept of male tax payers having to pay for them (Federally funded abortions)

Here is a hint for you girls if you use other people's money they are going to want some say so in how it is spent even if it used on your body. If you are using your own money to engage in your own little form of eugenics feel free to tell them to STFU.

Of course should the woman decide to keep the child and not terminate it, she has all the power in that decision/ Sure the guy choose to or not to exchange bodily fluids with a some slut but it takes to and since the woman is the one who gets pregnant (sorry girls but its science) One could argue she has a greater responsibility in the matter and since chicks want all the power/decision making authority when ti comes to keeping or killing the unborn child the can assume the financial responsibility to unless they are willing to share the authority.

I have notice that those who claim there is a war on women don't really claim about issues attacking equality but the free stuff and special treatment issues (which they call women's issues) Maternity leave , child care etc..

Look at eh Violence Against Women Act. Not the Violence against domestic partners, shack ups or violence against people or men act but Women.

Special funding for extra prosecution effort and enhanced penlites for violence against the alleged equal gender of female.

It is not about wanting equal treatment but want special treatment and free stuff.

Just a little secret, ladies, the foot in the jackboot that keeps you down belongs to a woman.

Generally speaking, you are by far more oppressive to each other than men, in this modern society of ours.

You refuse to work for other women, you partake in slut shaming, you actively destroy each other socially, and god help any woman that refuses to conform to social norms. I refer to feminists as cows not just for their general appearance, but for the herd instinct. You don't breastfeed? OSTRICIZE! You don't WANT a career? OSTRICIZE!

This of course applies only to feminists, because normal women are real human beings deserving of respect. (Cue the outcries of projection where you tell me what my interpretation of a normal woman is)

/a normal woman is one that has a sense of self and self respect not dependant on others for a sense of worth

I actually read crap about "patriarchy" and "rape culture" because feminism is the one-track train my daughters are on. My inescapable conclusion: Feminism is a hypocritical, narrow-minded cult of hate selling gross distortions and attacking anyone who questions them. The movement is dominated by young, white, middle-class women who have never worried about whether they will be allowed to see their children, let alone about food or even air conditioning. They demonize men, teach women to view themselves as victims, and lobby for special privileges.

You should have NEVER brought this up if you didn't expect it to be deconstructed in this conversation.

You've had my support through most of this conversation, but you are losing it here.

AngryDragon had a painful experience. As human beings striving for a better society, our response should be one of sympathy, not of dismissal.

I took your suggestion that he seek counseling for the grief as legitimate concern. So please read this in that same spirit: It seems like you have misplaced some anger toward an image of AngryDragon that is not deserved. You might want to think about whether or not that's true, and if it is, why.

You should have NEVER brought this up if you didn't expect it to be deconstructed in this conversation.

You haven't refuted anything. In fact, the very first sentence I typed AGREED with a woman's right to an abortion. Go back and read it.

All you've done is spout a political plank that had absolutely nothing to do with the point I made. And since you have no apparent rebuttal, your responses are becoming more and more vile, aggressive, and confrontational. If you are so absolutist in your opinion that you can't see that there are perfectly valid cases that should be addressed and discussed by all sides, then there is really no point in debating you.

For the record though, your perspective is exactly why modern feminism has a terrible reputation and its getting worse.

meep3d:I simply said the MRA movement is a response to the inequality and lack of support for men's causes

I disagree with this. As far as I can tell, it is a response to the mere existence of women's rights groups. And it seems to be a cynical attempt to steer the conversation to "both sides are equally disadvantaged", which is very far from the truth.

Don't get me wrong, there are laws that are biased towards the rights of women (due to historical realities of our society that have only recently begun to change). But there are far far more examples of laws and cultural attitudes that exist merely to put women "in their place". Both should change.

And just because someone only fights for rights that effect them personally, doesn't mean they are bad people. But you should really pick your allies carefully, and the general vibe that MRA groups put out is chauvinistic, sexist, authoritarian, and creepy.

hardinparamedic:And in reality, it doesn't work like that because our society got tired of leaving broke, uneducated, and multiple-child women thanks to men spreading their seed like little Johnny Apples across the United States, and having to pick up the tab

But it's the men's fault for spreading their seed and not the women's fault for spreading their legs? If a woman has the right to choose, she should also have the responsibility of living with her choice 100%, especially if the other partner is unwilling. Choice should go both ways. Not "I have the right to choose, but I'm not doing this by myself!"

hasty ambush:Look at the whole birth control abortion debate. for the Feminist the battle cry is my body my business and men should not be making laws about women's bodies. But when it comes to paying for the consequences of what they do with their bodies they sure don't object to the concept of male tax payers having to pay for them (Federally funded abortions)

I'm fine with women getting abortions. If you want the child and the father doesn't though, he should be able to sign off on parental/financial responsibility. I have both had a girlfriend have an abortion against my wishes and have been sued (falsely) for paternity. I can assure you that men have absolutely no say whatsoever in family matters and the courts and healthcare professions treat us like second class citizens.

Female child with male teacher, telling the truth = "Hang him high"Female child with male teacher, lying = "Hang him high, just to be safe"

There IS a disproportionate burden for proof of innocence on men involved with care of children. And some of the more vindictive children learn that they can bully a male adult with threats of "he touched me". I've worked with children in previous jobs (and loved it), but I will admit to coming to a rational conclusion: if the threat of child molesting is real, it's better to murder the kid. Even if proven guilty, you can be a reformed murderer. And secondly, they'd perform an autopsy on the body and find claims of sexual contact are false. Small comfort, but it still beats being labeled "accused sex offender".

As the father of a two year old girl who I hope will grow up to be whatever she wants to be... it's almost impossible to avoid/resist the Pink. It's everywhere, and unless you sew your own or make your girl dress in boys' clothes (options: military themed, construction themed, or Cars) you will have to give in at some point.

I barely made it a few paragraphs in, but I find it strange that she lets her children wear whatever they want, unless it's the Barbie pink crap. How about being a parent and help guide your child into appropriate social behaviour, like not wearing pajamas in public, and that sometimes you can't do whatever you want (like wearing boots in the summer), so you just have to live with it?

Oh good, another strawman RadFem that everyone can use to claim represents the actual philosophy of Feminism and dismiss arguments about civil and wage inequality, impropriety in prosecution of rape and abuse cases, and other bullshiat.

hardinparamedic:RockofAges: You nailed it -- this is how most women actually think and is why hardin / Jezebel are the fringers. Just as loony-tunes as true mysogynists, as in reality, they are misandrists.

You're right. I hate my own gender.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 850x566]

You're kidding, right? The media is full of all sorts of apologetic, self-flagellating men all seeking to atone for their father's sins at the altar of feminism. the fact that you are showing the same behaviors as them comes as a shock to no one who has been looking at these patterns.

Also, for the record, the fact that you were falsely accused of rape and STILL hold these views point to two possibilities:

Zasteva:In my humble opinion, the term "mansplaining" is less offensive than calling someone a radical or saying they are uninterested in equality because "mansplaining" is a jibe at a particular behavior, in this case a specific action of dismissing all of feminism as "not about equality". I thought the "mansplaining" response was a rather mild rebuke of that dismissal.

mansplaining is used to dismiss in entirety the entire MRA and degrade any concerns that a man could possibly have about inequality. It's the feminist equivalent of saying "know your place" and pretending that there is no legitimate sexism against men. It is patronizing at best and dismissive of an entire rights movement. The terms if quite offensive and no better than any other slur. I have never once seen someone use the term who actually cared about equality.

People often attack ideological positions that they don't agree with by acting like furthest out fringe of the group is what their mainstream is made up from. The people that believe in that ideology, that have rational positions, stop identifying with their own cause as a result. Over time, only the fringe element is left.

This happens in politics all the time.

The sad thing is, Feminism is something that almost everyone really should agree with. Most of our society would gladly tell you that they believe in the same things..... but, fewer people than ever would willing use the term "Feminist" to describe themselves. (And even if they do use that word.... they have to immediately explain to you that they aren't like the caricature Feminist that you are familiar with.

hardinparamedic:TwistedFark: This is likely just cheap cover for yourself, I doubt you wanted anyone to get anything out of discourse with you. I'm fairly certain that you did it solely for your own benefit, whatever that was.

Yep. I'm a sociopathic criminal mastermind of internet debate.

My gambit of engaging someone bluntly on a forum known for blunt conversation about topics posted to it is all part of a brilliant plan to do something evil. And Nefarious.

I wouldn't call talking at people debate and you're certainly not giving anyone anything or trying to change their views, if that was your goal, then not only would you be doing it in a completely different (and effective) way, you would probably actually be addressing what they said instead of stuff you're making up.

I see the entire exercise as you just "taking" something from this form. No idea why, but if I had to wager a guess I'd say that you often have trouble dealing with your emotions, particularly ones that make you feel vulnerable, hence you have a predilection for indulging in what we might call "empowering emotions", like anger, or righteous indignation. All people tend to do this as a coping mechanism as it helps us grapple with the world when we feel powerless inside it. It's not terribly healthy however to rely upon it as a substitute for addressing the fact that we're all vulnerable to some degree or another and need to risk being hurt to truly be able to feel.

hardinparamedic:clowncar on fire: I'm not sure how the poster suddenly becomes an advocate of the destruction of women's rights or blocking services to raped women. Seems a little bit of projection was involved there.

I would highly encourage you to read up on the MRA movement.

My problem is not with people who demand judicial reform and fair treatment of men in family court or rape cases. My issue is people who white knight the MRA movement for being involved in this, while ignoring the downright evil things the people they represent do in addition to this.

So basically you agree with the MRA movement:

My problem is not with people who demand judicial reform and fair treatment of men in family court or rape cases.

You just disagree with some of the people who belong in the movement? Why do you not equally condemn the feminist movement as it also has a very large problem with institutional sexism? Why can we dismiss the entire MRA movement with derision because of some of the members, yet not do the same to feminism. I mean what about the 'All men are rapists', 'Consensual sex is always rape', and the rest of that crazy bullshiat?

Maybe it's just because I live in Britain, where we all largely have moved on from caring about women's reproductive rights as anyone's issue but their own. When people say MRA I think http://www.fathers-4-justice.org/ and people who think that the recent trend of boys failing massively in schools is an actual issue.

More to the point I never really see people take the MRA people on on issues - it is always personal attacks, ad hominems and straw men.

hardinparamedic:AngryDragon: In my first case, I was being responsible. I was engaged to my girlfriend and planning on getting married, looking forward to our first child. Which she terminated without any discussion or warning.

So you weren't married. And she just "up and left you" and "terminated without warning"?

Please, tell us the WHOLE story. I have a feeling you're leaving something out to make yourself as the victim here.

AngryDragon: In the second case, I was being responsible. Used a condom and everything. When she showed up a year later for child support, I had my doubts, but agreed to do the right thing. I spoke to social services who had no problem ordering an immediate garnishment of my wages since I had been declared the father, but took their sweet time getting the paternity test done. Of course I wasn't the father. Funny thing is, she knew it. She was going from guy to guy that she had slept with at that time, unknown to me, and naming them at random. That way she could get her government benefits. The attorney basically told me that recovering any of the money that the state basically stole from me was hopeless.

So your issue with the state - which is a legitimate issue - justifies treating women like shiat, calling rape victims liars universally, harassing and even threatening to rape, murder, and torture people who disagree with them, and blocking healthcare and legal services to abused and raped women?

I agree with the first answer regarding the up and leaving part.

Also agree about having a legitimate issue with the state. My brother (and family) has dedicated several years to being a foster parent, taking on some of the hardest cases (infant left in a trailer to burn alive and substance abuse parents). When it comes to making decisions for what's best for the child's welfare, they always choose the most expedient rather than "what's right" path. The poster did what he believed to be what's right, by claiming responsibility for which the state would make little effort to overturn this decision by investigating who the real parent was- all in the name of expediency.

I'm not sure how the poster suddenly becomes an advocate of the destruction of women's rights or blocking services to raped women. Seems a little bit of projection was involved there.

hardinparamedic:Oh good, another strawman RadFem that everyone can use to claim represents the actual philosophy of Feminism and dismiss arguments about civil and wage inequality, impropriety in prosecution of rape and abuse cases, and other bullshiat.

hardinparamedic:So you weren't married. And she just "up and left you" and "terminated without warning"?

Please, tell us the WHOLE story. I have a feeling you're leaving something out to make yourself as the victim here

Sure. She freaked at being pregnant and went back to her druggie ex-boyfriend. I didn't say anything about being a victim, I said it was unjust because I had no input.

hardinparamedic:So your issue with the state - which is a legitimate issue - justifies treating women like shiat, calling rape victims liars universally, harassing and even threatening to rape, murder, and torture people who disagree with them, and blocking healthcare and legal services to abused and raped women?

What psychotic world do you live in? I gave you a valid example of someone using the system repeatedly and knowingly to defraud as many men as she could while being backed completely by governmental institutions. Where the hell did you get that I said anything on your list was justified? And my point was that DESPITE treating innocent men like criminals on nothing more than a woman's say so the problem of single family homes has just gotten WORSE.

So just so I have this right, even one woman being denied the right to choice is a tragedy, but any man being forced to experience a loss or being falsely accused if totally acceptable because of....equality? That sum it up?

meep3d and hardinparamedic, you're both actually making a good point (well at least one each, the rest I'm not so sure of).

The MRA movement is full of people who use the issue of "mens rights" as basically a front to express their dismay at the loss of white male privilege. I think it's perfectly sensible for hardinparamedic to call this out and say that they don't represent him, they certainly don't represent me. I'm sort of a nice healthy olive color anyway. Tan maybe.

Also, meep3d - you're right, people of all stripes/sizes/colors/genders have the right to come together to address issues or lobby for laws that they think are fair and just. I certainly have some issues with family court law and I don't think it's bad for organized groups to challenge them. I do think however that we would all be better served if the groups doing the challenging were a bit more respectable and based their advocacy on legal scholarship. After all, if we are going to challenge what is essentially a society gender norm regarding male responsibility in marriage/child rearing, then we have our work cut out for us in a way similar to how early feminists did when they had to challenge issues like discrimination in education and the workplace.

I don't actually find what you guys are saying as mutually exclusive. I think it's easier to agree that there is some need to advocate, or counter balance, the rights of men against the rights of women. It's a tricky balancing act to be sure, particularly when we are taking about challenging established cultural norms. However, I think it's perfectly fine to point out that the groups that are perhaps the most "public" about it, are often the most ill equipped to do anything either (I'll politely add "for various reasons", but my disdain for most of the MRA guys is not something of a closely guarded secret).

hardinparamedic:AngryDragon: Yes. The ready access to abortion and removal of any choice from the fathers has completely eliminated the scourge of single parent homes especially in the urban environments. That's why the number of single parent homes has doubled since 1970. Reality doesn't agree with your skewed perspective..

Mm. I was referring more to child support and parental responsibility laws there, but you go right ahead and misrepresent what I say. It's usually par for the course for these conversations.

And the man does have a choice.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 623x623]

Hell. If you're too cheap, you can get them from your local health department for free.

And if you're going to lecture on responsibility, at least see the irony in the fact you're arguing that you should be able to get someone pregnant whenever you want and not take your own responsibility for that.

AngryDragon: But it's the men's fault for spreading their seed and not the women's fault for spreading their legs? If a woman has the right to choose, she should also have the responsibility of living with her choice 100%, especially if the other partner is unwilling.

Really dude? Your argument boils down to the fact that as a man, you are so enthralled and weakened by vagina that you can't control your basic human instincts to bang the woman at the first chance?

Christ. I can't imagine what it would be like to live with the mentality that getting my dick wet was more important than common sense.

Which is exactly what I'm talking about.

In my first case, I was being responsible. I was engaged to my girlfriend and planning on getting married, looking forward to our first child. Which she terminated without any discussion or warning.

In the second case, I was being responsible. Used a condom and everything. When she showed up a year later for child support, I had my doubts, but agreed to do the right thing. I spoke to social services who had no problem ordering an immediate garnishment of my wages since I had been declared the father, but took their sweet time getting the paternity test done. Of course I wasn't the father. Funny thing is, she knew it. She was going from guy to guy that she had slept with at that time, unknown to me, and naming them at random. That way she could get her government benefits. The attorney basically told me that recovering any of the money that the state basically stole from me was hopeless.

I lived with the consequences of my actions. It must be nice to not have to and have it supported with the force of law.

hardinparamedic:meep3d: If you are a feminist and you dislike the MRA movement, realise it's a response to the fundamentally sexist nature of your own movement. If feminism was about equality the MRA movement wouldn't be a thing.

You should seek out employment in a dictatorship somewhere. That kind of propaganda writing doesn't come easily. Herr Goebbels would be proud.

I don't get it.

Men are discriminated against when it comes to their children and the law, and now it's becoming apparent they are falling behind in education. Who is fighting on their behalf? It's not the feminists.

You are perfect example of what I am talking about. All I said was that men are discriminated against in certain areas (with proof) and that if feminism will not attempt to redress the balance then a male movement is bound to emerge. And then you go and compare me to the Nazi's.

What do you suggest be done about family courts and education? And if men cannot address the issue can you tell me when you feminists will step up to the plate?

"Men will soon become the most disadvantaged group in the country when it comes to going to university, the head of UCAS predicts today." - http://ind.pn/1ecLUo6

Simply put, if women want equality they need to embrace a new platform of equality that is inclusive of men (which feminism isn't) or accept the existence of the MRA movement.

The amount of hate and vitriol that the MRA movement gets from feminists is quite simply disgusting. And the movement exists because men are being disadvantaged in a lot of areas that now matter more to them. When a dad, who is denied access to see his children, is ridiculed and attacked for trying to fix the inherent problems in the system it's obvious that despite feminism's claims to be for 'equality' it's blatantly not.

If you are a feminist and you dislike the MRA movement, realise it's a response to the fundamentally sexist nature of your own movement. If feminism was about equality the MRA movement wouldn't be a thing.

Headline: Mother nearly falls into a fit of apoplexy and is forced to confront her irrational fear of the color pink when her daughter asks for a pink pair or "sparkly princess tennis shoes." Because FEMINISM

Actual Article: Mother feels irrationally uncomfortable about pink shoes but then thinks about it and realizes she's being ridiculous. Writes an article urging parents to love their children for who they are, rather than trying to shield them from everything they don't like in the world

maxheck:I'll say this... I actually enjoy being the cool indestructable uncle. I have Disney Princesses hanging on my boots, and hardy lads trying to punch the living shiat out of me. And yet I take my neices and nephews in stride.

How messed up is that as a measure of love?

Nieces and nephews are all the fun of having kids without all the responsibility.

I've got 6 of them and I try to be the cool or fun uncle.

Took the oldest to DragonCon a couple of years ago and he had a blast.

One of my oldest friends is an executive at Fox* and the breadwinner in her family. Her husband is a public school teacher and musician. They have a very successful marriage, and had the careers been reversed, no one would bat an eye.

They are happily raising two sparkly pink daughters. I think the role model they see in their own family will more than make up for the fact that the girls love princesses and rainbows.

Feminism isn't about women fitting a single narrow niche. It's about women having the right to do anything they want.

What i want to know is why this mother is so obviously transphobic and hateful to her proud queer toddler

It's OBVIOUS that her 3 year old daughter is gender self identified as female, and needs to be supported as a FtF transition candidate. I would even go so far as to say that the child should start hormone replacement therapy so as not to miss the critical window to be able to look as girly as possible despite her bad luck to be born as the wrong sex.

Without the support this little GIRL(yes really, you can call someone like this by the gender they choose) needs, she could die. What do you cis people even know about these issues.

While not always the case, it seems to me that children wearing ridiculous clothing is the result of a parent being lazy and not wanting to deal with a tantrum. Yes, allowing children to make choices for themselves and self-identify is definitely necessary to raising a successful well adjusted adult. You also have to teach them to make the right choices. Sweaters and winter clothes in summer is not one of them, and it's your duty to explain *why*. Not because "people will look at you funny" or "people will judge you based on appearances", even though they will and that in itself can be cause of limits in life (news flash: appearances and how you present yourself matters!), but because "you'll get dehydrated if you try and play soccer in a parka. Now get in short sleeves and a t-shirt before I jump down your throat and stomp on your damn liver, asshole. You make daddy want to drink."

Since you're new here, allow me to elaborate: People like this are wet dream wank material for MRAs and general idiots, because they serve as living proof of the strawmen they like to construct about feminists.

Warlordtrooper:How many feminists do you know that will argue for equality of men in cases where females have an advantage over males?

You mean the inequality in family court situations which MRAs tend to wank about as the reason they're general pigs to women?

Articles like this is why it's harder and harder for people to not roll their eyes at the word "feminism". I'd tell you to stop representing ideas with the dumbest members of the bunch, but that'd cut down on pageclicks.

Finally a feminist type applies rational thinking and comes to an appropriately sane conclusion, and you people rag on her like the's the Devil himself. She might have had some silly ideas lingering about in her head from her idealistic youth (doesn't everyone), but the important thing is she confronted those ideas, came to the conclusion they were wrong, and then had the nerve to admit it and write about it.

That is what the world needs more of. I, for one, tip my hat to the author. More imperfect people like her would make the world a better place.

I, for one, have to thank the author. She has added another data point for my case against the recognition of "women's studies" as an academic field (I refuse to legitimize that contemptible abuse of the education system by referring to it as a "discipline").

She has done a man's job of demonstrating how vapid and intellectually bankrupt feminism is.

Excuse me while I get my 12 year old daughter from her ceramics class and get ready to go shooting with her.

Oblio13:I actually read crap about "patriarchy" and "rape culture" because feminism is the one-track train my daughters are on. My inescapable conclusion: Feminism is a hypocritical, narrow-minded cult of hate selling gross distortions and attacking anyone who questions them. The movement is dominated by young, white, middle-class women who have never worried about whether they will be allowed to see their children, let alone about food or even air conditioning. They demonize men, teach women to view themselves as victims, and lobby for special privileges.

I have some terrible news for you. I have it on good authority that your "daughters" don't actually exist and instead are mere "straw men" created by the MRA community in an attempt to discredit "True" feminism.

hardinparamedic:Oh good, another strawman RadFem that everyone can use to claim represents the actual philosophy of Feminism and dismiss arguments about civil and wage inequality, impropriety in prosecution of rape and abuse cases, and other bullshiat.

The problem with your position is you suggest that everyone who has a problem with feminism dismisses it's positions on civil and wage inequality, and impropriety in prosecutions of rape and abuse cases. However, nothing could be further from the facts.

Consider these questions:

1. Should people be nice to each other?2. Should everyone preforming the exact same job, for the same company, receive the same compensation?3. Should rapists be prosecuted?4. Should people who abuse others be prosecuted?

If you asked 1000 people those questions, you would be hard pressed to find anyone who would answer in the negative. This is because the affirmative positions are widely held societal beliefs. As such, they don't define feminism. It is the positions that differ from widely held societal beliefs that define groups.

Let me give you an example. A church composed of members who would answer the four aforementioned questions in the affirmative, who believed it wrong to be mean to anyone, might still be very opposed to gay marriage. They are not defined by the beliefs that they share with the overwhelming majority of society. They are judged by their absolute oppositions to gay marriage.

hardinparamedic:Oh good, another strawman RadFem that everyone can use to claim represents the actual philosophy of Feminism and dismiss arguments about civil and wage inequality, impropriety in prosecution of rape and abuse cases, and other bullshiat.

I had this argument with another Social Justice Warrior. When the majority of people using your label are batshiat insane, they do represent the base line. Rational feminists (e.g. Lauren Faust) who are willing to call themselves feminists are few and far between. Probably because a lot of these 3rd wavers never had to deal with actual persecution for being a women, they tend to blow shiat out of proportion. For example: that chick on tumblr who makes the posts about guys sitting wrong on trains and how being forced to ask someone if they can move their legs so you can sit down is a tragedy of epic proportions. Or maybe even a violation of her civil rights! Like it or not, that is the face of modern feminism.

Ivan the Tolerable:When will self-hating insecure radfem coonts ever figure out women have the freedom to be a princess if they want to be, right alongside also being a complete badass? People like this articles author are the type of knee-jerk idiots that refuse to even cook for themselves because that would 'oppress' them, then talk about being independent and being a whole person. Its as obscene as it is pathetic.

TFA: But that is way too much information for a 3-year-old, so what I say is, "Eva, I love your shoes. They're great. I'm sorry I didn't listen to you the first time."

hardinparamedic:TwistedFark: I see the entire exercise as you just "taking" something from this form. No idea why, but if I had to wager a guess I'd say that you often have trouble dealing with your emotions, particularly ones that make you feel vulnerable, hence you have a predilection for indulging in what we might call "empowering emotions", like anger, or righteous indignation. All people tend to do this as a coping mechanism as it helps us grapple with the world when we feel powerless inside it. It's not terribly healthy however to rely upon it as a substitute for addressing the fact that we're all vulnerable to some degree or another and need to risk being hurt to truly be able to feel.

I have my reason for being passionate about being against the MRA movement. No, I will not share them.

I was wrong for attacking AngryDragon like that, I will admit, based on my assumption that he was defending them or their philosophies. But unless you're a psychiatric professional setting right in front of me, please hold off on trying to psychoanalyze me?

But here you are, making sweeping judgements against others. You refuse to let people draw conclusions about yourself based on things you've said, but feel justified in judging entire groups of people based on what you believe some of them may think.

hardinparamedic:PawisBetlog: looks like you got some sand in your vagina sugartits...

Well, I can see you failed fourth grade sexual education. ^_^

Since you're new here, allow me to elaborate: People like this are wet dream wank material for MRAs and general idiots, because they serve as living proof of the strawmen they like to construct about feminists.

Warlordtrooper: How many feminists do you know that will argue for equality of men in cases where females have an advantage over males?

You mean the inequality in family court situations which MRAs tend to wank about as the reason they're general pigs to women?

I find it fascinating that you can at the same time write off an actual event that actually happened and was actually caused by an actual feminist as a straw man, yet go on to unironically construct a straw man about what you imagine men's rights advocates to be in order to shift the discussion to a point where you feel you have the upper hand. And you do this without the tiniest shred of self awareness. It's almost like you're a not too bright, hypocritical ideologue who cares more about making your point than about having a fair and open discussion about gender issues.

/feminism is a discriminatory, uterocentric word that precludes the ideas that people other than women can ever be wronged, or that women can wrong other women//how about humanism instead?

hardinparamedic:meep3d: I don't feel 'persecuted' or 'victimised'. I just think you're rude and obnoxious and using your superiority complex to justify your antisocial behaviour. But this is the Internet, where the anonymity for some reason makes people think it's somehow fine to act in a way that would normally be socially unacceptable.

No. I'm just as rude and obnoxious to people who treat women like crap, or defend people who do, in real life.

I really don't think you are, Mr ITG. And anyway you just plow straight in with the abuse based on your own prejudices and desire to see what you want to see. I've only really said that Feminism alone is not a solution to gender inequality and tried to talk about some real, tangible examples.

Besides, there is no excuse for bad manners. I disagree with you thus can treat you like crap is the basis for the behaviour of sexism and racism. If you are willing to treat people like crap because they deem them 'lesser' then I don't see how you are any different from the people you allegedly oppose.

AngryDragon:I appreciate the gesture. Make no mistake though, I wasn't defending anyone. I was raising my experiences as empirical evidence that there is injustice in the archaic system we've adopted for all sides.

I doubt seriously that your posts were educational vehicles though. You are the extreme polar opposite of those you despise. No extreme ever has the entire right answer. Ever.

If you were not intending to defend them, I apologize for attacking you like that.

hardinparamedic:That's all I wanted out of this entire thing was for you to see the kind of people who you were defending. Even a little bit.

Maybe what I just got you will be a small consolation for putting up with me being an asshole these past few posts

I appreciate the gesture. Make no mistake though, I wasn't defending anyone. I was raising my experiences as empirical evidence that there is injustice in the archaic system we've adopted for all sides.

I doubt seriously that your posts were educational vehicles though. You are the extreme polar opposite of those you despise. No extreme ever has the entire right answer. Ever.

hardinparamedic:bahr: You're distorting, misrepresenting, and outright dissembling, and it speaks to some deeper psychological or mental damage that I am neither qualified to assess nor care about you enough to be concerned with.

I HATE the color pink. My daughter loves it. I let her wear pink because it's just a color, not a statement of politics. Those politics are put on the color by us; the color does not care about anything.

The feminist movement was born, in part, out of the idea that men controlled everything and did not care a damn about women or how that affected them.

Unfortunately, when the feminist movement started changing things, they did to the men what they argued men had done to them: made changes, made demands, and pushed things forward without concern to how this would affect men. They are just as guilty as gendered, limited, and selfish thinking as they stated men were.

I do not buy into this women make X amount of money per hour versus men who make Y per hour for the same job. IF it is true it is because women tend to leave the work world to have babies or take care of family members who are terminal, not because they have vaginas.

I hate that the courts are biased toward women, even when it's clear the woman has no earthly business having the kids. Giving birth make make a woman a mother, but it does not make her a mommy.

hardinparamedic:That's the thing. There is no serious scenario for MRA. They really don't care about men's rights as a whole - they legitimately refer to any male who does not share their views as "traitors to their gender", akin to the whole "Traitor to their race" thing that is so popular in white supremacy.

But it is the MRA's who fight against strawmen. You are farking delusional.

hardinparamedic:hasty ambush: Family court, child custody, Obamacare (all that free stuff attached for women's health issues)etc.Look at child support. In many states DNA evidence can prove a man is not the father of the child but he still can get stuck with child support. When was the last time a woman got stuck paying child support for a child that was not hers?

In every one of those cases, the men who were ordered to pay child support had their names willingly placed on the birth certificate as the legal father of that child. You seem to leave that fact out.

In most cases that is because the lying coont told their husband/boyfriend that they were the father . There was that whole trust in relationship thing that women are successful in exploiting. Rare is the man who will accept the paternity of a kid he knows isn't his. And if he has been found to have been lied to why shouldn't the law allow for a correction, along with at least a civil prosecution of the mom for fraud?

hasty ambush: Look at the whole birth control abortion debate. for the Feminist the battle cry is my body my business and men should not be making laws about women's bodies. But when it comes to paying for the consequences of what they do with their bodies they sure don't object to the concept of male tax payers having to pay for them (Federally funded abortions)

Here is a hint for you girls if you use other people's money they are going to want some say so in how it is spent even if it used on your body. If you are using your own money to engage in your own little form of eugenics feel free to tell them to STFU.That's an incredibly long winded and idiotic way to tell us you have no clue what you're talking about, since the various Hyde amendments prohibit the federal funding of abortion outside of a court order or medical necessity.

Which does not keep Obama and other feminists from demanding otherwise.

;As a controversial bill banning federal abortion funding heads to the House floor this week, the Obama administration is threatening a veto if it reaches the president's desk.Link

Plus just because and organization can't using federal funds for abortions the availability of those funds doe snot prevent it from directing its other revenue for abortions-the x among of federal dollars they receive for rent, building maintenance and condoms mean d they can take a similar amount, from a different source formally dedicated to such things and use it for abortions. So in way the tax pauyers are still funding abortions.

hasty ambush: Look at eh Violence Against Women Act. Not the Violence against domestic partners, shack ups or violence against people or men act but Women.

Special funding for extra prosecution effort and enhanced penlites for violence against the alleged equal gender of female.

It is not about wanting equal treatment but want special treatment and free stuff.

Okay, you can solve this easily.

Give me objective numbers on how many men versus how many women are abused each year in the United States. How many end up in the ER or in hospital because of that abuse? How many end ...

And your point would be what? That perhaps women are more likly report things like being assaulted?

It seems strange to me that the gender fighting for the right to serve as a Marine Rifleman or Army infantryman and endure the rigors of the battlefield on an equal footing with men find themselves unable to handle the rigors of the civilian world on an equal basis. Unless of course they are going to insist on special battlefield rules to accommodate them.

Because, where as what you describe represents the fringe of feminism - namely radical feminism, despite your attempt to paint ALL feminist philosophies in the same light, the MRA movement represents the fringe of their respective side as well.

See, here's the thing, I do dismiss those people the same as I do MRA. By openly mocking them, in fact.

I'm not even involved in the MRA movement at all, I only acknowledge that discrimination is not a single sided issue and think that it is worth addressing. If anything I'd say you have the problem, as you jumped right in to calling me a Nazi (and don't weasel out, there are plenty of less polarizing propagandists, you picked a facist for a reason) for simply saying that the maybe the movement has a point. You didn't care what my viewpoint was, in fact you didn't even read what I wrote (and I kept it short) and moved straight on to the accusations and abuse. No wonder you say that all MRA supporters are evil since you don't apparently read what they say.

I am only defending here as it seems all it takes to get this torrent of hate is to suggest that feminism alone is not a road to true equality. And if you do think that a movement that, at it's core, excludes the other side of the debate by default then you lack the critical thinking skills to even be worth talking to.

hardinparamedic:TwistedFark: But the thing is, you're not deconstructing anything. You're painting strawmen all around this guy and then using that to be condescending.

Why are you doing this? What sort of benefit are you getting out of it?

I'm actually not. He's using the fact that his girlfriend got an abortion without his permission to do so as a reason to try to justify forcing women to carry a fetus against their will to term, OR forcing them to sign away their right to seek remediation and child support because someone was gaming the system and he happened to be the unfortunate victim of that, ignoring the fact that he is the exception rather than the rule of the deadbeat dad evading the system.

The fact he actually compared what happened to him with the plight of a rape victim being blamed for her rape and forced to cary his rapist's offspring as being exactly similar demonstrates how separate from reality that belief is.

And I'm getting a paycheck from Big Feminism. Seriously?

What on earth is wrong with you? He said nothing of the sort. You're distorting, misrepresenting, and outright dissembling, and it speaks to some deeper psychological or mental damage that I am neither qualified to assess nor care about you enough to be concerned with.

The one true thing you've said is that you're not getting a paycheck from Big Feminism. That's because they wouldn't have anything to do with someone as contemptible as you. I am a passionate advocate of causes supporting the protection of rights across all genders and let me tell you, you are NOT helping.

hardinparamedic:AngryDragon: But you are right, there is no point in discussing any of this with someone like you. Interesting conversation though Will probably have to look into this MRA thing because anything opposed to your confrontational and hostile position must have some merit. Thanks for the heads up.

Absolutely! Anything I can do to further your idea that the ends of depriving rights from women are justified by what happened to you individually.

You'll fit right in.

I'm confident, after 5 minutes of browsing there, in saying this:

You are all insane. Them and you.

I am proud to say, as with most things in my life, I'm a centrist on this issue. Feminists and MRAs. Don't you people have anything better to do? What the hell ever happened to HUMAN rights?

hardinparamedic:TwistedFark: I agree, there is little difference between the way hardinparamedic has dismissed his emotional well being as a concern as to how a extreme religious conservative would dismiss the emotional well being of his ex-girlfriend for doing what she did.

Pointing out how his emotional objections to what happened do not justify the road he is leading down with that statement is the same as telling a woman that God was the one that had her rapist brutalize her, violate her in the most intimate way possible, and forcibly impregnate her against her will with a fetus she never wanted in the first place, and then forcing her to carry that child to term where it will allow that rapist to continue to manipulate her life for the rest of her natural?

Really.

Yeah, you're arguing in your own head at this point. Granted, it was a clumsy analogy, but you're trying to build a rocketship out of scooter parts.

hardinparamedic:TwistedFark: I agree, there is little difference between the way hardinparamedic has dismissed his emotional well being as a concern as to how a extreme religious conservative would dismiss the emotional well being of his ex-girlfriend for doing what she did.

Pointing out how his emotional objections to what happened do not justify the road he is leading down with that statement is the same as telling a woman that God was the one that had her rapist brutalize her, violate her in the most intimate way possible, and forcibly impregnate her against her will with a fetus she never wanted in the first place, and then forcing her to carry that child to term where it will allow that rapist to continue to manipulate her life for the rest of her natural?

Really.

You can't see that you're the only one who is inferring some "road he is leading down with that statement." Why do you have to extrapolate things that are never said, or even barely inferred to attempt to make a point? What's going on with you that you need to do this?

Nabb1:Warlordtrooper: In every one of those cases, the men who were ordered to pay child support had their names willingly placed on the birth certificate as the legal father of that child. You seem to leave that fact out.

Unless the man is the biological father (excluding cases where the man is raped) or he went through an official adoption agency, there is no legitimate reason why he should be on the hook to support a kid. Placing his name on a piece of paper does not make the kids DNA change so it's his biological kid.

In some states, a child born in marriage is legally presumed to be the child of the husband and even if they divorce and DNA evidence later proves the husband was not the biological father, he cannot avoid child support. That's how it works in Louisiana. Legal acknowledgement of paternity can be very difficult to over come.

But that's my point about men being treated unfairly. They shouldnt be forced to provide for a child that is not theirs. It's nice if they choose to but it shouldn't be forced upon them if they are not the biological father

hardinparamedic:MRAs are excusable for their vile behavior because they happen to tout that

I have no idea what this means.

hardinparamedic:That the system should be thrown out, and protections based on gender should be thrown out because of exceptions to the system as a whole

I never said that.

But you are right, there is no point in discussing any of this with someone like you. Interesting conversation though Will probably have to look into this MRA thing because anything opposed to your confrontational and hostile position must have some merit. Thanks for the heads up.

hardinparamedic:And then you went on the attack for a woman exercising her right to abortion because she didn't gain your consent for it first, while avoiding the disturbing implication that you're actually advocating forcing a woman to carry a fetus to term if her partner does not agree to that abortion.

So... since when is describing the negative ramifications of someone elses actions on your own emotional wellbeing an attack on said other person?

Ker_Thwap:hardinparamedic: TwistedFark: But the thing is, you're not deconstructing anything. You're painting strawmen all around this guy and then using that to be condescending.

Why are you doing this? What sort of benefit are you getting out of it?

I'm actually not. He's using the fact that his girlfriend got an abortion without his permission to do so as a reason to try to justify forcing women to carry a fetus against their will to term, OR forcing them to sign away their right to seek remediation and child support because someone was gaming the system and he happened to be the unfortunate victim of that, ignoring the fact that he is the exception rather than the rule of the deadbeat dad evading the system.

The fact he actually compared what happened to him with the plight of a rape victim being blamed for her rape and forced to cary his rapist's offspring as being exactly similar demonstrates how separate from reality that belief is.

And I'm getting a paycheck from Big Feminism. Seriously?

I read his explanation differently. I read that he was talking about his emotional reaction as being comparable. After someone so rudely told him to seek counseling for having emotions. Nuances.

To me it was just that he shared something emotionally difficult with us by way of saying, "Here's something for consideration as well." which is a perfectly valid, and I guess around here, a particularly brave thing to do.

Even his comparison wasn't directly about him, it was more about the attack on him - and I agree, there is little difference between the way hardinparamedic has dismissed his emotional well being as a concern as to how a extreme religious conservative would dismiss the emotional well being of his ex-girlfriend for doing what she did.

AngryDragon:If you are so absolutist in your opinion that you can't see that there are perfectly valid cases that should be addressed and discussed by all sides, then there is really no point in debating you.

No. I've actually admitted, for the third time now, that there are cases that should be discussed by all sides. I've actually agreed with you on the need for judicial reform. What I haven't agreed with, and absolutely will not agree with is:

1) MRAs are excusable for their vile behavior because they happen to tout that.2) That the system should be thrown out, and protections based on gender should be thrown out because of exceptions to the system as a whole.

You might disagree with me on these. I really don't care, because if those two are what you want to debate on, it's going to be pointless as neither of us will change our minds.

AngryDragon:In fact, the very first sentence I typed AGREED with a woman's right to an abortion. Go back and read it.

And then you went on the attack for a woman exercising her right to abortion because she didn't gain your consent for it first, while avoiding the disturbing implication that you're actually advocating forcing a woman to carry a fetus to term if her partner does not agree to that abortion.

Warlordtrooper:In every one of those cases, the men who were ordered to pay child support had their names willingly placed on the birth certificate as the legal father of that child. You seem to leave that fact out.

Unless the man is the biological father (excluding cases where the man is raped) or he went through an official adoption agency, there is no legitimate reason why he should be on the hook to support a kid. Placing his name on a piece of paper does not make the kids DNA change so it's his biological kid.

In some states, a child born in marriage is legally presumed to be the child of the husband and even if they divorce and DNA evidence later proves the husband was not the biological father, he cannot avoid child support. That's how it works in Louisiana. Legal acknowledgement of paternity can be very difficult to over come.

hardinparamedic:TwistedFark: But the thing is, you're not deconstructing anything. You're painting strawmen all around this guy and then using that to be condescending.

Why are you doing this? What sort of benefit are you getting out of it?

I'm actually not. He's using the fact that his girlfriend got an abortion without his permission to do so as a reason to try to justify forcing women to carry a fetus against their will to term, OR forcing them to sign away their right to seek remediation and child support because someone was gaming the system and he happened to be the unfortunate victim of that, ignoring the fact that he is the exception rather than the rule of the deadbeat dad evading the system.

The fact he actually compared what happened to him with the plight of a rape victim being blamed for her rape and forced to cary his rapist's offspring as being exactly similar demonstrates how separate from reality that belief is.

And I'm getting a paycheck from Big Feminism. Seriously?

I read his explanation differently. I read that he was talking about his emotional reaction as being comparable. After someone so rudely told him to seek counseling for having emotions. Nuances.

AngryDragon:Oh, and as far as you telling me to basically get over it because my future wife had an abortion without telling me? I came to terms with it long ago. Screw you though. That is no different from some conservative asshole saying that you have to carry to term because you got raped and you'll get over it.

Clearly not,

And yeah. It's EXACTLY like that. It's EXACTLY like forcing a woman to endager her life and livelyhood to carry her rapist's baby, where it will remain a CONSTANT reminder of her victimization and - as an added bonus - can be sued for custody of in 34 states.

hardinparamedic:baconbeard: Exactly. "No True Feminist" would do such a thing.

You're not as clever as you think. ^_^

AngryDragon: Sure. She freaked at being pregnant and went back to her druggie ex-boyfriend. I didn't say anything about being a victim, I said it was unjust because I had no input.

Tragic. I hate to say this in such a cold, callous way, but did you ever think that seeing someone that can help you deal with your anger and grief MIGHT be a little more healthy than trying to white knight a group of people who pride themselves on being as vile as they can to anyone with a vagina?

What she did was her decision. Torturing yourself and, byproxy, other people over it isn't any way to go through life.

AngryDragon: What psychotic world do you live in? I gave you a valid example of someone using the system repeatedly and knowingly to defraud as many men as she could while being backed completely by governmental institutions.

Which is just as valid and rational an argument as trying to justify spending millions of dollars to drug test every welfare recipient to find that one in a million person who's using crack cocaine on the Government dole.

Because you can create an exception to the rule does not invalidate the general rule. You know this.

AngryDragon: Where the hell did you get that I said anything on your list was justified?

You're white knighting a group that does just that, rather than trying to champion judicial reforms, your ire is directed to the fact that someone doesn't support that group. In fact, I have already told you I AGREE with the need for reforms - and you're still attacking me for the fact I won't support MRAs.

AngryDragon: So just so I have this right, even one woman being denied the right to choice is a tragedy, but any man being forced to experience a loss or being falsely accused if totally acceptable because of....equality? That sum it up?

You do not have the right to affect the self-determination of others when it comes to their health ...

Jesus. What the fark are you talking about? Who the fark am I "white-knighting"? You are the one attacking me. I'm giving you perfectly valid experiences of why the laws are unjust in a very narrow range of circumstances and you have me supporting rapists, drug-testing of welfare recipients, and treating women as "spawn incubators.

What the fark is wrong with you?

Oh, and as far as you telling me to basically get over it because my future wife had an abortion without telling me? I came to terms with it long ago. Screw you though. That is no different from some conservative asshole saying that you have to carry to term because you got raped and you'll get over it.

hardinparamedic:clowncar on fire: I'm not sure how the poster suddenly becomes an advocate of the destruction of women's rights or blocking services to raped women. Seems a little bit of projection was involved there.

I would highly encourage you to read up on the MRA movement.

My problem is not with people who demand judicial reform and fair treatment of men in family court or rape cases. My issue is people who white knight the MRA movement for being involved in this, while ignoring the downright evil things the people they represent do in addition to this.

You're generalizing. All people who generalize like bunnies and Hitler.

meep3d: Men are discriminated against when it comes to their children and the law, and now it's becoming apparent they are falling behind in education. Who is fighting on their behalf? It's not the feminists.

I'm afraid I simply don't agree with the premise that men are discriminated against when it comes to children and the law.

I have female friends who had to fight tooth and nail to get even occasional visitation with their children because their husbands decided to make false claims about them being unfaithful. Even if it were true, it has nothing to do with their ability to raise their children. These were cases of the husbands striking back because they wives wanted a divorce, pure and simple, and the courts went along with it.

I have another friend who recently asked me if I could give her a place to stay for a few days since she needed to get away from her husband who was starting to become physically abusive. After talking to the attorney she had drawing up divorce papers she said actually she needed to look for some other place, because staying at a man's house could prejudice the case against her.

Another woman I know was ordered by the divorce judge to stay in the tiny Georgia town they lived in until her infant daughter was 18, to protect the visitation rights of the abusive husband she was divorcing.

In many cases a woman who is staying home raising the kids has no resources to mount a proper legal defense if the husband decides to involve attorneys.

On the topic of men falling behind in education, it appears to be primarily be men's choice to pursue other things than education (of course there are individual exceptions)

In particular, the question is why men don't see as much value in a college education as women do? I suspect that if you polled people about their attitudes toward college, you would find that more women see college as their main opportunity to make something better of themselves than men do. This is because men recognize, if only subconsciously, that they have a lot of things in their favor just because they are men; whereas women recognize that they have more adversity to overcome and they need the benefits of higher education to compete.

What do you suggest be done about family courts and education? And if men cannot address the issue can you tell me when you feminists will step up to the plate?

For family courts, I'm not sure there is a problem to solve. The courts vary widely in who they favor based on individual circumstances and the particular viewpoint of the judge. If you want to protect your rights, the best bet is to have an amenable divorce and keep the lawyers completely out of it.

For education, reducing the cost seems to be the best way to get more men to enroll in college.

I'm a big fan of reasoned debate, it's not fun when you make a single point and someone equates you as the spokesman for the entire movement.

I'm not a MRA fan in general, because like every other group out there (feminists included) there are too many radicals attempting to speak for everyone. I only speak for myself, and that way I'm never asked to defend anything other than my own words and thoughts.

So she's okay with her son wearing dresses and pink (if she had one) but her daughter can't.

Feminism might be about a lot of things but true equality is not one of them

hardinparamedic:pxlboy: I've seen posts like that on Tumblr written without a hint of irony.

Tumblr is a wretched hive of sum, villainy, PC ridiculousness, and ACTUAL RadFem.

Hell. Even I make fun of those people, and I'm pretty into feminism and social justice causes.

Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: The only really serious scenario for men's rights activists I can think of involves allegations of sexual contact with children.

That's the thing. There is no serious scenario for MRA. They really don't care about men's rights as a whole - they legitimately refer to any male who does not share their views as "traitors to their gender", akin to the whole "Traitor to their race" thing that is so popular in white supremacy. They just latch on to certain issues of judicial and social reform, such as the area you just mentioned, or false rape allegations, or family court reform issues, and like a parasite or a creationist wedge theory use it to promote their idea that treating women sub-human and like a pig is justified because of X and Y.

Yeah but again you're kinda throwing the baby out with the bathwater. I'm an egalitarian I believe in gender equality for all. I don't believe in feminism in it's modern state because it puts women above men. also pushing a stereotype and political label I do not need.

As a woman who has had to endure a lot of crap from feminists teachers and professors growing up because my dad had the balls to stand up to my mentally ill mom and take care of me. But then later have no support later because of his gender. (circa 1980s) I support the good ones.

There are Men's Right's groups that are not related to that other crap that are lead by some pretty awesome people. But it's the other groups that make it harder for them to make a any headroom.

There has been research shown that most judges are gender bias when it comes to sentencing. Family courts and child support is always given the burden to the man. We have seen it on fark too where the worse mothers of the world get off with a slap on the wrist for the most heinous of crime sprees.

Feminism has become so radical that I don't even recognize it any more. Especially when I see things like "OMG RUBBER DUCKS PATRARCHY!" type stuff on tumblr.

hardinparamedic:meep3d: Men are discriminated against when it comes to their children and the law, and now it's becoming apparent they are falling behind in education. Who is fighting on their behalf? It's not the feminists.

Yeah, it's not the Orwellian named "Men's Rights Advocates" either.

Here's the thing. MRAs don't care about my rights as a man. They care about their reactionary knee-jerk to the death of traditional society. Like creationist wedge theory, your ilk uses legitimate issues with the legal system and men in family law to weasel in and justify their own beliefs on how women "should be treated".

If you people only cared about the "rights of men", you wouldn't be organizing campaigns of death threats and rape intimidation threats against people who speak about feminist topics that have nothing to do with family law. You wouldn't be white knighting rapists and child/spousal abusers. You wouldn't be filling forums of pathetic whine about how "WOMEN WONT LOOK AT ME WAAH" and trying to justify why it's the "slut"s fault you have to pay child support, but not your fault for not using protection and common sense to begin with.

meep3d: And then you go and compare me to the Nazi's.

No. I compared you to a man who made his livelihood on telling open, bald faced lies. Man up, cupcake, and grow a skin. If you're going to openly lie on a level that is propagandish in nature, expect to be called out on it.

Is it absolutely vital that you be quite so rude all the time? I deliberately avoided your style of angry shouty rude word soup to try and get the debate on to points rather than just abuse. So much for that.

I simply said the MRA movement is a response to the inequality and lack of support for men's causes. Sure the movement is bound to have some morons but the fact it exists is because men are not represented by feminists. So I'll repeat the question:

What do you suggest be done about family courts and education? Men cannot/should not form a group to address these issues and feminists won't. So what is the answer?

AngryDragon:In the second case, I was being responsible. Used a condom and everything. When she showed up a year later for child support, I had my doubts, but agreed to do the right thing. I spoke to social services who had no problem ordering an immediate garnishment of my wages since I had been declared the father, but took their sweet time getting the paternity test done. Of course I wasn't the father. Funny thing is, she knew it. She was going from guy to guy that she had slept with at that time, unknown to me, and naming them at random. That way she could get her government benefits. The attorney basically told me that recovering any of the money that the state basically stole from me was hopeless.

I had a similar thing happen to me, but thankfully I demanded a paternity test before anything went that far. I found out after the fact that the only reason why she engaged in a relationship with me was because I was well off. Basically she targeted me because of my wallet.

This made me feel really bad, I think it's hard for women to really understand that even though it seems like men may hold all the cards in society, we have feelings and do actually want to be loved and valued for something more than just how much money we have, or our social status, or how powerful society perceives us to be.

So, anyway, no lasting harm done to me I suppose, but I do agree that family law is basically sexist. It seems to exist solely on the somewhat out-dated premise that a mans responsibility to a family is to provide income. Certainly, that's how this woman viewed it.

And while I might advocate for more egalitarian ways to solve some of these complex social issues (child support, education, etc) - I have to say that I don't agree with any of the "movements". In principle I favour equality for all, but not by inflicting an injustice on another. I know many people think this is impractical, and perhaps it is - but I would say that ideals are often impractical, but so long as we let them guide our conscience we are charting the right course.

meep3d:Men are discriminated against when it comes to their children and the law, and now it's becoming apparent they are falling behind in education. Who is fighting on their behalf? It's not the feminists.

Here's the thing. MRAs don't care about my rights as a man. They care about their reactionary knee-jerk to the death of traditional society. Like creationist wedge theory, your ilk uses legitimate issues with the legal system and men in family law to weasel in and justify their own beliefs on how women "should be treated".

If you people only cared about the "rights of men", you wouldn't be organizing campaigns of death threats and rape intimidation threats against people who speak about feminist topics that have nothing to do with family law. You wouldn't be white knighting rapists and child/spousal abusers. You wouldn't be filling forums of pathetic whine about how "WOMEN WONT LOOK AT ME WAAH" and trying to justify why it's the "slut"s fault you have to pay child support, but not your fault for not using protection and common sense to begin with.

No. I compared you to a man who made his livelihood on telling open, bald faced lies. Man up, cupcake, and grow a skin. If you're going to openly lie on a level that is propagandish in nature, expect to be called out on it.

hardinparamedic:meep3d: If you are a feminist and you dislike the MRA movement, realise it's a response to the fundamentally sexist nature of your own movement. If feminism was about equality the MRA movement wouldn't be a thing.

You should seek out employment in a dictatorship somewhere. That kind of propaganda writing doesn't come easily. Herr Goebbels would be proud.

Wow, you managed to bring nazi's into a discussion about shoes! You completely ignored the point about equality and why there is a MRA movement. I realize something, you never actually address anything anyone says that disagrees with your worldview. All you do is commit personal attacks.

onyxruby: Wow, you are desperate this morning. I was raised by feminists, two of them. The organize the march and protest in the streets kind. My parents had me study feminism from when I was young. You could say it's something I've studied my entire life.

So either you're full of shiat, or you read at or below a fourth grade level. Which is it? Because it's either ONE or the other with the way you've been ranting in this thread.

I haven't had any rants, your seeing things that weren't written. It's impossible to have a discussion with a radical, and you certainly can't debate anything with someone who's responses consist of pure derp.

Mansplaining is an offensive word, used to degrade anyone that doesn't agree with feminism or questions how it actually deals with equality. It is however quite useful for letting the world know that the person using it is radical with no interest in equality.

Now that. That is riled up. Wow!

Men who have never had a woman show any interest in them are frequently angry little failures.

AngryDragon:Yes. The ready access to abortion and removal of any choice from the fathers has completely eliminated the scourge of single parent homes especially in the urban environments. That's why the number of single parent homes has doubled since 1970. Reality doesn't agree with your skewed perspective..

Mm. I was referring more to child support and parental responsibility laws there, but you go right ahead and misrepresent what I say. It's usually par for the course for these conversations.

And the man does have a choice.

Hell. If you're too cheap, you can get them from your local health department for free.

And if you're going to lecture on responsibility, at least see the irony in the fact you're arguing that you should be able to get someone pregnant whenever you want and not take your own responsibility for that.

AngryDragon:But it's the men's fault for spreading their seed and not the women's fault for spreading their legs? If a woman has the right to choose, she should also have the responsibility of living with her choice 100%, especially if the other partner is unwilling.

Really dude? Your argument boils down to the fact that as a man, you are so enthralled and weakened by vagina that you can't control your basic human instincts to bang the woman at the first chance?

Christ. I can't imagine what it would be like to live with the mentality that getting my dick wet was more important than common sense.

hardinparamedic:You have no idea what radical feminism is if you think TFA is it.

Wow, you are desperate this morning. I was raised by feminists, two of them. The organize the march and protest in the streets kind. My parents had me study feminism from when I was young. You could say it's something I've studied my entire life.

At no point did I ever say or infer anything about the article. There are fundamentally 2 schools of feminism. The first school is simply interested in equality between the sexes and wants to ensure this happens. The second school is interested in getting women as many as many special privileges over men as possible. I have no problem with the first school and with equality between the sexes. Which school are you in?

Why is it that when black people ask for equal rights, they are fighting for racial equality, and when gay people ask for equal rights, they are asking for sexual equality, but when women ask for equal rights, they decided to label themselves "Feminists"?

Why is it that, what I would consider to be called "being a decent human being", ie "treating women equally", has to be labelled as "feminism" by women? It makes it sound like if a woman wants to fight for equality, she's on THEIR side. Like she HAS to take sides.

Ladies, please stop using the feminism label. The very wording of it makes it sound like it puts women above every other race and gender and identity.

AngryDragon:If you want the child and the father doesn't though, he should be able to sign off on parental/financial responsibility. I have both had a girlfriend have an abortion against my wishes and have been sued (falsely) for paternity. I can assure you that men have absolutely no say whatsoever in family matters and the courts and healthcare professions treat us like second class citizens.

And in reality, it doesn't work like that because our society got tired of leaving broke, uneducated, and multiple-child women thanks to men spreading their seed like little Johnny Apples across the United States, and having to pick up the tab.

And the wonderful thing about that is that you're actually arguing you should be able to violate the constitutional rights and basic human rights of a woman by forcing her to carry to term a fetus, but you say you're not treated fairly by the healthcare and legal establishment.

hasty ambush:Family court, child custody, Obamacare (all that free stuff attached for women's health issues)etc.Look at child support. In many states DNA evidence can prove a man is not the father of the child but he still can get stuck with child support. When was the last time a woman got stuck paying child support for a child that was not hers?

In every one of those cases, the men who were ordered to pay child support had their names willingly placed on the birth certificate as the legal father of that child. You seem to leave that fact out.

hasty ambush:Look at the whole birth control abortion debate. for the Feminist the battle cry is my body my business and men should not be making laws about women's bodies. But when it comes to paying for the consequences of what they do with their bodies they sure don't object to the concept of male tax payers having to pay for them (Federally funded abortions)

Here is a hint for you girls if you use other people's money they are going to want some say so in how it is spent even if it used on your body. If you are using your own money to engage in your own little form of eugenics feel free to tell them to STFU.

That's an incredibly long winded and idiotic way to tell us you have no clue what you're talking about, since the various Hyde amendments prohibit the federal funding of abortion outside of a court order or medical necessity.

hasty ambush:Look at eh Violence Against Women Act. Not the Violence against domestic partners, shack ups or violence against people or men act but Women.

Special funding for extra prosecution effort and enhanced penlites for violence against the alleged equal gender of female.

It is not about wanting equal treatment but want special treatment and free stuff.

Okay, you can solve this easily.

Give me objective numbers on how many men versus how many women are abused each year in the United States. How many end up in the ER or in hospital because of that abuse? How many end up murdered or forced into prostitution?

I'm sure you had the same dismissive attitude about how women were traditionally treated. If you had any interest at all in equality you would reflect on what you wrote and realize that being an ass about things shows your prejudice, inflames sexist attitudes and makes feminism look bad. Really what it does though is show that you have no interest in equality.

Nabb1:Two points: At least she has the awareness to self reflect on her feelings and opinions; and she nought her daughter those shoes. She's still a fairly judgmental person. My wife, a successful physician, mother and big fan of Disney Princesses would probably tell her to lighten up. You can let your daughters be themselves and still instill confidence in them.

I really feel like anyone complaining about Disney Princess Syndrome hasn't really watched anything Disney has put out in 20 years. I mean yeah, I get it, the original Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, etc are pretty bad in retrospect. But between Sophia, Doc McStuffins, Tinkerbell, and Izzy from Jake and the Neverland Pirates, Disney essentially has a whole channel now that is trying to teach toddler girls how to solve problems, be confident in themselves, etc. Even recent direct to DVD stuff involving older properties like Cinderella or Ariel have the princesses kicking ass and taking names.

bbfreak:True feminism is something that benefits both men and women, and even transgender people. Unfortunately so many people, women and men included misunderstand what feminism is. You are one of them

So according to this woman, Feminism is the ability for her little girl to choose her own path, unless that path conflicts with mommy dearest's world view? Oh, and also those same rules would apply to her son.

Zasteva:Just for everyone's amusement, why don't you give us some examples of places were you think women have advantages over men.

Moving up the career ladder at a government job. One of the thing government managers are evaluated on for their performance reviews is EEO. If a woman/minority working for you gets promoted, you get an "exceeds expectations" and a good chance at a nice little bonus.

I'm not opposed to EEO in general, but in the specific it's annoying when you see less qualified people pass you by. (I had no problem when the brighter ones passed me) I can't say I liked paying for the sins of the prior generation. Level the playing field, sure, but let's not tilt it in the other direction.

AntiGravitas:If you cannot let your daughter have these shoes because of your ideas, then you are just as controlled by gender conformity rules as anyone else. You just react AGAINST rather than TO. Either way you are not as enlightened as you think you are.

lack of warmth:God Is My Co-Pirate: 1. They're just shoes.2. You don't have to buy them.

Signed,- a feminist

She didn't buy them. The conflict wasn't just her views, but with her forcing them on her daughter in a manner that really isn't something to fight a child over. Shoes only have to be able to do the job you are asking of them and be in the price range that you wish to spend, after that, I don't really care what my daughter picks. My daughter likes dresses, and clothes in bright colors including pink with peace symbols, but I don't care for it. I reduce the girlie-ness by introducing her to sports watching with me and boxing, not watching boxing, actually putting on gloves and swinging at me. Anyways, the child will decide for themselves who they are and the parent is to love them and teach them to be safe. It drives me crazy watching people push their own agendas and taste on children that just doesn't want to spend two hours brushing really long hair.

Yogimus:Feminism is a shield weak willed women use to protect themselves against the world.

No. True feminism is about equality between the sexes. For the longest time women and men have been shaped by these damaging and restrictive ideas of what it means to be a man or woman.

Boys are suppose to only like blue, manly colors while playing with boy toys and then grow up to do manly jobs. Women meanwhile are suppose to only like pink, are only suppose to play with girl toys and grow up to do "woman's work".

True feminism is something that benefits both men and women, and even transgender people. Unfortunately so many people, women and men included misunderstand what feminism is. You are one of them.

hardinparamedic:pxlboy: The only person on my blog is an old friend of mine, her posts are full of the aforementioned. I go for the humor and art blogs.

I deleted my tumblr after a post about another user which used the word "attention whore" got me several multi-paragraph, angry replies about "slut shaming".

The person in question was using a non-existent illness (Chronic Lyme Disease) to beg for money.

I'm not surprised. The poster to which I refer is similarly inclined towards PC posting, "privilege" posts, and stuff about chronic pain or illness (but does not specify which), and routinely makes excuses why she can't get healthy.

I'm pregnant with my 2nd child at the moment, first daughter, and I've been thinking a lot about the whole princess thing.

I farking HATE "princess culture", always have, even when I was a kid, and I absolutely will not encourage it with my little girl when she is very young. However, once she reaches an age where she's more influenced by her peers, if she wants to watch princess movies and play with princess things I won't forbid it and won't make her feel bad for liking these things (while still encouraging her to have other interests, of course).

I'll probably try to steer her more towards the more competent princesses though. Like Princess Bubblegum from Adventure Time. She smart, gets shiat done and doesn't take crap from anyone. If more princesses were written like her I'd have a lot fewer issues with the whole genre.

And man, pink is almost impossible to avoid! I'm aiming for a less than 25% concentration for her wardrobe at the moment but I'm not sure how I'll fare.

Nabb1:Two points: At least she has the awareness to self reflect on her feelings and opinions; and she nought her daughter those shoes. She's still a fairly judgmental person. My wife, a successful physician, mother and big fan of Disney Princesses would probably tell her to lighten up. You can let your daughters be themselves and still instill confidence in them.

Agreed.

Her heart is definitely in the right place and she's self aware enough to know when she's pushing her own shiat on her kids. I don't think people should be coming down hard on her, because really what harm did she do? Admit that she was wrong about pinning her hang-ups on her kid?

Really, I wish more people in general would reflect on this. I see an awful lot of bad parenting going on mostly related to people putting their own fears and failures on their children.

The motto I have is simple: Teach the kids the game, let them decide how they want to play it.

My wife grew up wearing pinks and purples, and can sing every song Disney has ever produced by heart. She's also an Army officer with a Combat Action Badge, served with a Field Artillery battalion and an infantry brigade, and does Tough Mudder and Spartan runs for fun. She still loves pink sparkly stuff, and went with a friend to the Frozen Sing Along last night. This woman reads way too much into color choices.

Almost as fun as when I find a serious researcher who tries to rationalize the pink/blue dimorphism as either a evolutionary selection or some shiat like "blue dyes were expensive and reserved for boys, but pinks were cheap and leftover for girls". You know, because the trend of dressing small children differently is modern. Before 1930 we saw girls dressed in "calming blues" and pink was a warm male color.

"She lives in the San Francisco Bay Area, where she is working on her first novel."

Hmm, sometimes I worry about how mankind seems to be regressing into autocracy because of the indifference of most people to the loss of the freedoms they gained over the last several centuries, but I guess sparkly pink princess shoes are just as valid a concern to San Francisco writers.